Useful Searches

Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Of course this has been a hot topic since the latest laws coming out of Georgia and Alabama. However, may people have argued that it is wrong to "force a rape victim to carry a baby to term" and that it is up to the victim to decide if the baby should die. All the pictures below are children of rape victims. Well, if the mother can determine the value of the life of her child and she decides that these children are worthless and don't deserve to live, are we supposed to do the same? Why or why not? Would you look these children in the eye and tell them they are worthless because their mother believes so? If not, why would their value be any different before they were born?Children Born Of Rape Pose To Show That They’re Beautiful And Can Be Loved Too

Rape should not be a death sentence for a child that is born as the cause of that crime. Both the mother and child are innocent victims. For a mother to have an abortion for that reason makes the mother a murderer, as well as the rapist father, and it will be appoint for both of them to die and afterwards appear in the Judgment.

"The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them" (Ezekiel 18:20).

"But if you cause one of these little ones who trusts in me to fall into sin, it would be better for you to have a large millstone tied around your neck and be drowned in the depths of the sea" (Matthew 18:6).

I always say a mother cannot put a value on the baby because the baby also had no choice in its creation. A mother that chooses to abort is basically punishing the child and thus a murderer.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I doubt that this thread is going to get much traction from the pro-abortion crowd because confronts them with images of actual children they suggest should have been terminated before they were born.

You'll have to excuse my Purple Political Perspective in which I'd say that, yes, a rape victim "can" make that valuation. But, I won't confuse this with the separate yet related issue of whether a rape victim "should" make this valuation. I also won't confuse either of these semantic positions with the altogether other issue of whether Christians SHOULD impose (or force) upon rape victims, who are permanently traumatized by the experience of having been raped, yet another form of victimization.

If WE do impose this kind of legislation upon rape victims, I sure hope that Christians who have pushed for these laws are ready to put their money where their mouth is and be ready to help provide not only 24/7 emotional and financial support for the rape victim bearing a child but ALSO be ready to provide actual assistance 24/7 with helping the victimized woman raise the children who have come into the world through her as a result of rape.

So, the real question is: Can Christians [specifically American ones in this case] make this kind of leap, or are they going to complain that someone is pushing against their rights to abstain from assisting?

The mother does not think her children are worthless. She just knows it is not a good time to have a child or even carry one in her body and because a rapist fertilized the egg, she would have to raise a kid alone. Remember rapists often target teenagers and girls can get pregnant before they are old enough to drive or get jobs.

Second, you are implying that the unborn child of a raped girl or woman are less worth and value. If that were not so, they wouldn't dare seek an abortion and you wouldn't support that decision. You are saying that the life of the unborn child is not worth the comfort and emotional state of the mother. You can try to spin it all you want to rationalize your position. However, ultimately the truth is that the baby is aborted because the mother, and those who support the mother's decision, doesn't believe the life of the child is worth enough to deserve to live.

Think about this for a minute: Girls and women who know they are not able to raise a child in any way or do what it takes to get ready for one are aware the baby will suffer, not just themselves. Every state that passes anti-abortion legislation totally ignores this and fails to help the mother and baby. The state, not a young mother, is responsible if her baby is born and has a horrible life throughout childhood.

Think about this for a minute: Girls and women who know they are not able to raise a child in any way or do what it takes to get ready for one are aware the baby will suffer, not just themselves. Every state that passes anti-abortion legislation totally ignores this and fails to help the mother and baby. The state, not a young mother, is responsible if her baby is born and has a horrible life throughout childhood.

Click to expand...

Ever hear of adoption? I know many couples who for medical reasons cannot have children and would love to adopt. You are grasping for excuses that do not exist. Second, talk about mercy killing. You are implying that the quality of life after birth determines the value of the life before birth? Does it make you feel better thinking that it is okay to kill the unborn to spare them of suffering in life regardless of the fact that it can have a happy life through adoption? Or is it okay to kill the baby because it will spare the suffering of the mother having that she doesn't have to endure the baby is adopted?

If there are so many families out there just waiting to adopt, then why haven't they done it yet? There are plenty of children out there, who often spend an average of 3 years in the foster care system, who are waiting to be adopted and yet why are they all still there? Why doesn't anyone want *them*? You would think that with all of these hypothetical parents out there desperate for children, there wouldn't be anyone out there waiting to be adopted as they would be snapped up immediately.

NUF, I am not making up any excuses. The problems that lead aped girls and women to choose abortions are real. Adoption is only an option if they are mentally and physically able to stay pregnant all 9 months. You probably do not realize adopting out babies when they are born is easier said than done and in many places almost impossible.

NUF, I am not making up any excuses. The problems that lead aped girls and women to choose abortions are real. Adoption is only an option if they are mentally and physically able to stay pregnant all 9 months. You probably do not realize adopting out babies when they are born is easier said than done and in many places almost impossible.

Click to expand...

So the baby doesn't deserve to live because the baby may have to live in a foster home? Are they that bad that babies should be terminated? Would you look at these children pictured in the OP and tell them they would have been better off dead?

If there are so many families out there just waiting to adopt, then why haven't they done it yet? There are plenty of children out there, who often spend an average of 3 years in the foster care system, who are waiting to be adopted and yet why are they all still there? Why doesn't anyone want *them*? You would think that with all of these hypothetical parents out there desperate for children, there wouldn't be anyone out there waiting to be adopted as they would be snapped up immediately.

Click to expand...

Are foster homes so bad that babies deserve a mercy killing? Would you look at these children pictured in the OP and tell them they would have been better off dead?

So the baby doesn't deserve to live because the baby may have to live in a foster home? Are they that bad that babies should be terminated? Would you look at these children pictured in the OP and tell them they would have been better off dead?

Click to expand...

Babies deserve to live . . . in good loving homes, with the same families throughout their lives, instead of being bounced around from one foster home to the next. If nobody is able and willing to commit to caring for the baby through childhood and beyond, the child will literally feel unwanted and unloved. Kids do not deserve to live in foster homes; they need permanent homes while they are still babies.

Babies deserve to live . . . in good loving homes, with the same families throughout their lives, instead of being bounced around from one foster home to the next. If nobody is able and willing to commit to caring for the baby through childhood and beyond, the child will literally feel unwanted and unloved. Kids do not deserve to live in foster homes; they need permanent homes while they are still babies.

Click to expand...

So children who may have to go into foster homes are better off dead? That is what you are saying? Would you look at these children pictured above and tell them they are better off dead?

Are foster homes so bad that babies deserve a mercy killing? Would you look at these children pictured in the OP and tell them they would have been better off dead?

Click to expand...

No one is disputing the personhood of children who are already born. They are autonomous and not demanding the use of someone's body in order to live. As for whether or not they would have been better off dead, we can't know just by looking at a picture and knowing nothing about the circumstances of their lives, or whether those children even exist outside of Photoshop.

The issue isn't whether or not the unborn deserve to live, but whether or not they have the right to the use of someone else's body in order to do so.

So children who may have to go into foster homes are better off dead? That is what you are saying? Would you look at these children pictured above and tell them they are better off dead?

Click to expand...

No. I am saying children do not deserve to have bad lives because of poor living situations. So if a foster home where the people firmly want to adopt a newborn infant is not available, the state is at fault, not the mother, for abortions because they don't get the necessary care before and after birth.

Problem with abortion people is no matter what they justify it. To many in foster care, to expensive, I was raped, are you going to pay for it....etc. There is no reason at all that justifies an abortion. None. If someone is trying to find a reason then it shows they are intent on killing the baby. Now is anyone saying having to go through 9 months is fair? Having to get a hefty bill? Having to have the child wait in foster care? Of course not. It's not fair. But there is no other option. At least as a christian.

This is what sets us apart from non-believers. We have rules have to follow. Life above all else, no killing.